The Bishop of Gloucester tabled a question on the progress of the government’s 2018 Female Offender Strategy on 21st June 2021:
The Lord Bishop of Gloucester: To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the progress towards the implementation of the Female Offender Strategy, published on 27 June 2018; and what plans they have, if any, to revise the timetable for its implementation.
On 18th May the Bishop of Manchester spoke in the fourth day of debate on the Queen’s Speech, focusing on proposals for policing, building safety and conversion therapy.
My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Fullbrook, whose wisdom I look forward to hearing more often, for an excellent maiden speech. I also refer to my interests, stated in the register, in policing and housing.
A number of Bills mentioned in the gracious Speech will require our police to enforce new laws and regulations. We have already seen considerable disquiet expressed regarding what might amount to a very significant reduction in the ability of the public to engage in peaceful political protest, particularly where such protests directly or indirectly impact on others. I will reserve more detailed comments on this Bill for when it reaches your Lordships’ House, although I note the wise comments made earlier by the noble Baroness, Lady Chakrabarti. For now, I want briefly to lay it alongside my experience of 12 months of rapidly changing coronavirus regulations.
On many occasions, the precise boundaries between regulations—matters that police can enforce—and guidance, to which they can only direct our attention, have been seriously blurred. Meanwhile, ministerial statements have put pressure on our police to issue fixed penalty notices, but the Crown Prosecution Service is quite clear that an adequate chain of evidence will be almost impossible to achieve.
On 18th May 2021 the Bishop of Gloucester took part in the fourth day of debate in the House of Lords on the Queen’s Speech. She focused on criminal justice, violence against women and girls, and online safety:
My Lords, I too look forward to the maiden speeches of the noble Baroness, Lady Fullbrook and Lady Fleet. In my few minutes, I shall briefly mention women in the criminal justice system, the Police, Crime Sentencing and Courts Bill, violence against women and girls and the online safety Bill. I refer to my interests in the register, as Anglican bishop to prisons.
I begin by asking: when will we see a renewed timetable for the 2018 female offender strategy? While I welcome the implementation of some of the deliverables, analysis by the Prison Reform Trust shows that the Government have met less than half the commitments. The concordat published last year does not appear to have been progressed. Then there was that shocking announcement of 500 new prison places for women, totally at odds with the strategy’s direction to reduce the number of women in prison. What evidence is it based on, and why is the designated £150 million not being spent on women’s centres and implementing the concordat?
The Bishop of Gloucester spoke in a debate on the second reading of the Prisons (Substance Testing) Bill on 16th April 2021, welcoming the bill and stressing the need for rehabilitation to be at the centre of the prison system:
The Lord Bishop of Gloucester: My Lords, I add my condolences to those already expressed regarding the sad death of Dame Cheryl Gillan. I echo others in affirming that it is her commitment to reform that means that we are discussing these issues today.
I declare my interest, as stated in the register, as Anglican bishop for prisons in England and Wales. It is a great privilege for me to visit a variety of establishments. In conversations with prisoners, governors and chaplains, you get a sense of those issues that, if tackled, could have a real impact. Drug use within prisons is one of those issues.
On 13th April 2021, the House of Lords debated the Overseas Operations (Service Personnel and Veterans) Bill. Votes were held on amendments to the bill, in which Bishops took part:
The Bishop of St Albans received the following written answer on 12th April 2021:
The Lord Bishop of St Albans asked Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Williams of Trafford on 8 March (HL13499), how many cases were brought forward for (1) forcing someone to marry, and (2) breaching a forced marriage protection order, under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, in (a) 2014, (b) 2015, (c) 2016, (d) 2017, (e) 2018, (f) 2019, and (g) 2020.
The Bishop of Gloucester asked a question on methods of tackling violence against women on 16th March 2021, following a government statement on the death of Sarah Everard and the police response at the recent memorial gathering:
The Lord Bishop of Gloucester: My Lords, I too want to assure Sarah Everard’s family and friends of my thoughts and prayers. A couple of times in this House I have mentioned the work being done in Australia, the first country in the world to develop a national framework to prevent violence against women and girls. “Change the Story” identifies gendered drivers of violence and engages people where they live, work, learn and play. Will the Government take a serious look at Australia’s work and see what we can learn? Regarding the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, we will not be doing the right service to violence against women and girls unless we also ensure that we address the issue of that large group of women in prison for minor but repeated offences. Many are there because of the violence towards them and they need appropriate trauma-informed, community-based provision. Can the Minister assure the House that the issues about crime and sentencing will be looked at in a rounded and not a disconnected way?
The Bishop of Gloucester spoke during a debate on amendments to the Domestic Abuse Bill on 10th March 2021, supporting an amendment on community services, and further amendments seeking to clarify the statutory defences for victims of domestic abuse who commit an offence:
The Lord Bishop of Gloucester [V]: My Lords, my friend the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Derby, who regrets that she cannot be here today, was pleased to support the noble Lord, Lord Polak, when his amendment on specialist and community-based services was discussed in Committee. We really warmly welcome the government amendments, which represent significant improvements on the Bill. All that being said, I am glad that the noble Lord, Lord Rosser, introduced Amendment 85 so that we might just press a little further. I do not want to repeat what other noble Lords have said, so I will make just a few brief comments.
We have heard repeatedly in debates in this House of the value of specialist and community-based services which allow survivors to remain in their homes and retain their community, their faith links and their workplaces and to keep children in their schools. Finding a long-term solution, as others have said, to supporting these services is essential. With colleagues on the Bishops’ Bench, I look forward to engaging with the victims’ law consultation and to reviewing the promised Clause 8 report from the domestic abuse commissioner to Parliament on the provision of, and need for, community-based support services.
On 10th March 2021, the House of Lords debated the Domestic Abuse Bill in Report. Votes were held on amendments to the bill, in which Bishops took part:
On 21st March 2021, the House of Lords debated amendments to the Overseas Operations (Service Personnel and Veterans) Bill. The Bishop of Leeds spoke in support of amendment 14, which would provide that the presumption against prosecution in the bill does not apply to war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide or torture:
The Lord Bishop of Leeds: My Lords, I understand the stated rationale for this Bill and I state at the outset that I have enormous respect for the noble Baroness the Minister, but I am struggling. I am not a lawyer, but I would like to focus on a couple of specific questions. I understand the difficulty with vexatious and untimely litigation, which is a curse, but legitimate litigation, however inconvenient, is surely the blessing of a free and civilised society that honours international law and a rules-based system in more than words.
The basic reason why I speak in support of Amendment 14 is that I fear the law of predictable or conscious consequences more than the law of unintended consequences. I ask the Minister to explain clearly this anomaly, which I cannot get my head around: this Bill, as currently drafted, will make it possible for an incident of torture or murder not to be prosecuted while a sexual offence committed in the same incident would be subject to prosecution. That suggests to me either that the reference to sexual offences is arbitrary or that torture and crimes against humanity and so on should also be admitted in the same category.
The Church of England in Parliament 
You must be logged in to post a comment.